“The whole dissident idea attracts a lot of crazies. And then all of a sudden, without realizing it, you've become one of them." Peter Duesberg, 2009

BUYING THIS BOOK WILL HELP TREAT PEOPLE WITH HIV IN AFRICA!!

Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy

Seeking Stories of AIDS Denialism

Have you or someone you know been harmed by AIDS Denialism? If you, or someone you care about, have been advised to stop taking HIV meds, ignore HIV test results, purchase a 'natural' cure etc., please email me.

aidsandbehavior@yahoo.com

All information will be kept confidential.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

The death of Emery Taylor has set off a disturbing action in the “dissident” (denialist) community. They have taken this death as a Publicity Opportunity to “Circle the Wagons”. Mr. Taylor’s death has become a call to arms to batten down the hatches and decide if you are a true “dissident” or a “denialist”. This has started because Mr. Taylor’s death was a “classic AIDS Death” according to Gos, an AIDS dissident blogger, who is also afraid this fact “will prove to be a massive crisis of faith for many who currently call themselves ‘AIDS dissidents’”. Gos goes on to conjecture that the truth of Mr. Taylor’s death “will make or break us.”

To me this is powerfully disturbing and hypocritical. The denialists say that the “orthodox” is dancing on Mr. Taylor’s grave. This may be true of a very few. But I do not see anyone of the “orthodox” using the death of a human being as propaganda. Of course the denialists have been known to stoop to such tactics in the past. For example, Jonathan Barnett has gone so far as to place a Skull & Crossbones over the face of his close, personal friends after their deaths. As another example, Celia Farber and Clark Baker trotted out the Al-Bayatti version of Christine Maggiore’s Autopsy Report on the anniversary of her death. Just as both of these examples have disgusted the majority and failed to further their agenda, so too will this latest attempt. It is a definite show of desperation in a Cult that is already decreasing in numbers.

Here is how Gos defines dissident vs. denialist:

The difference between a dissident and a denialist is this: A dissident never stops questioning, and is not above constantly questioning his own beliefs. A denialist, on the other hand, holds dear to his heart a quasi-religious certitude that the facts are thus-and-such and that there's NO WAY he could ever possibly be wrong. A dissident seeks to come ever closer to the truth. A denialist is 100% convinced that he already knows the truth, and no one will ever get him to revise his opinion, much less change it.

Yet if we were to take a closer look at the rest of Gos’ words and those of others, they do not hold fast to this rule in every instance, if indeed ANY instance.

This is especially clear when the denialists discuss HAART. Most recently we have Karri Stokely who adamantly and viciously claims that HAART is deadly and has caused all her severe illnesses for the 11 years she was on HAART. Karri also steadfastly decries that her recent CMV colitis (a classic AIDS illness, BTW) is completely the result of“toxic HIV meds.” Liam Scheff has written many times that HIV meds, those damned black box drugs, “destroy every single cell of the human body.” Celia Farber has vociferously made these exact same claims for years in SPIN Magazine and infamously in Harpers. Duesberg claims AZT is the cause of AIDS. Let’s not forget that EVERY Denialist claims AZT is 100% deadly and is not useful in any way, shape or form.

The denialists are equally steadfast in their refusal to believe that Christine Maggiore’s death was due to AIDS nor that her daughter, Eliza Jane is dead because of her mothers steadfast refusal to allow even 1% possibility that she might, possibly, perhaps be wrong! If they are so sure of this, then why did they not make Maggiore’s REAL Autopsy Report public? Is it because they are holding "dear to theirheart a quasi-religious certitude that the facts are thus-and-such and that there's NO WAY he could ever possibly be wrong” as Gos wrote?

These examples barely scratch the surface. What this all boils down to is these people have no faith in science or the research of the past 30 years. NONE! They claim the tests are crap. The virus has never been isolated. There are no Electron Micrographs of HIV. The medications do not work and are 100% toxic. All they can muster is that the meds“may help in a very short term for some people.” Is this questioning or holding steadfast?

I could go on and on with examples but the truth is these people will never believe the truth. There is no discussion. There is not one iota of concession. It is just lay, scared people trying to talk themselves out of facing the truth. The problem is, in telling themselves lies others also get caught up and wind up as Emery Taylor. Unfortunately the death of a friend or even a daughter will not allow them to ask themselves: "what if, perhaps, maybe, I am wrong?"

Note: The views of

Concerned Observant Citizen are his or her own, and do not necessarily represent mine or this blog. Although they do!

26 comments:

Looks like Rethinking AIDS does not know what to do about E-Tay on their website. What, no memorial? Still exploiting him?Should be interesting to see how they spin KS as having nothing to do with AIDS. I suppose that Al-Bayatti is working up an autopsy el pronto.

In the previous post regarding Emery Taylor I wrote in the comment section how the Denialists tend to accuse the dead denialists of using drugs and alcohol to explain their deaths. Now Jonathan Barnett is doing exactly that at QA.com and his own blog.

Barnett wrote that when he asked Emery's partner Billy if Emery used poppers, "Billy would not answer and I did not persue it."

NOW at QA.com Barnett is making the accusation AGAIN but this time not only is Barnett directly contradicting his own words, he is being outright hypocritical!

Barnett writes:"Billy tells me that Emery would never use poppers and would have been averse to them. I believe him, but it isn't proof that it never happened either."

So which is it, Jonathan? Did Billy "not answer" the direct question? Or did Billy tell you Emery "would NEVER use poppers and would have been averse to them."??

But do notice how even above, Jonathan still inserts a very strong insinuation that "it isn't proof that it never happened either."

I guess this is just one more example of why Barnett is a "dissident" and not a "denialist" as Concerned Observant Citizen writes here. Barnett seems to still be asking the question:"Did Emery use poppers or not?"

What a great example of the hypocrisy and disgusting tactics of these denialists.

Sarah- they will do the same for their current poster-child who took the place of Maggiore, Karri Stokely. She is dying of AIDS and they will do the same thing. Their modus operandi is:1 Brainwash the vulnerable. 2 let them die by convincing them not to take their meds3 do a fake autopsy using a veterinarian (Al Bayati)4 get a new poster child

- they did this with Maggiore. Then Kim Bannon. Then Carter. Now Stokely. Try asking these whack jobs how Kim Bannon is doing. But what can you expect from a group of unstable people led by a unemployed middle-aged candle maker in jer supported by her daddy and a fired cop with nocollege education...

Jonathan, thanks for contributing this beautiful piece of journalism. I hope that you will definitely follow up on the "poppers" angle. Yes, we all know that poppers cause KS, but linking those drugs to Emery might close the knowledge gap in this case and further accentuate the dangers of poppers.

In men who are currently aggressive about staying clean in lifestyle and diet, could a history of poppers use in the past could cause problems -- particularly after starting these "cleansing" diets now fashionable in the dissident community? I suspect this was the case for a friend of mine who died a couple of years ago, who had KS lesions all over his body and died of apparent pneumonia..."

Mrs. Maggiore failed to live up to her credo, “Alive and Well,” and it is my perception that asking “why” is, however difficult, also fair. It is my bias, based on inside information, that Mrs. Maggiore suffered health issues, and took pharmaceutical drugs earlier in her life, that she did not report widely, which may have contributed to her HIV test status.

It was also my experience that actively maintaining her health at a high level was not a significant priority, or was neglected. This was visible to me during the time I briefly attempted to work with her, in 2003, and I have had similar reports from before and after.

I hope to give the fullest account of both of these horrible incidents, either critical or supportive, contrary to or supporting my own perception, taking in what is known from people familiar with the cases.

If you have inside information, please do share with me what you know.

"While Emery was in the hospital a year later [December 2010], doctors did find the source of the troubling chest pains and that proved the final blow for Emery. KS. Kaposi Sarcoma. One of the original AIDS-defining diseases, was disseminated in Emery’s lungs. There was more KS on his upper thigh."

"Why is there an assumption that the information I've shared from Billy implies that Emery died of KS? I didn't write that. I reported that he had KS, whatever that is...

"I do not believe that there is any evidence that having the manifestations that Emery had shortly before dying gives credence to the mainstream view of "AIDS". I chose not to state that in my article, because I wanted readers to draw their own conclusions. It's called striving to be objective."

Hey Seth, you f#@&ing ignorant dumb ass! I guess you conveniently ignore the fact that Emory Taylor died from LUNG CANCER, but I'm sure you'll twist the shit around and say he had pneumonia. Do you want to know what a psychologist is?....A stupid motherf@&er who couldn't become a psychiatrist. Eat that you shit sucking c*@&ksucker! And I don't give a f#%k if you post this or not!By Anonymous on Denial Desperation at 4:28 AM

AnonymousI may be too dumb to be a psychiatrist, but you must be some kind of retard not to know that Emery died of AIDS. Thanks to you and your AIDS Denialist friends, he failed to head off a disease that few people in the US die of since the miracle drugs came on the scene. He had KS. Don't you even read Resistance is Fruitful?

No Seth, you're wrong. No one dies of "AIDS". AIDS is just the name of the syndrome in which a virus called HIV depletes a person's immune system, leaving that person open to all sorts of infections. It is the infection/cancer that actually kills them. In Taylor's case, Kaposi Sarcoma killed him. He may have had compounding issues as well such as pneumonia but we'll never know for sure unless, of course, the great all knowing Al-Bayati tells us for sure.

Sorry to correct you Seth, but you know these Denialists can be. We gotta stick to the facts.

Karri is doing fine..and still with us ...so is Brian Carter.....at least you can admit they are both still alive....I know for a fact that Brian isn't too happy with you right now posting that bullshit that he died....so when did you finally realize he wasn't? When the crack wore off?

Karri is doing fine? Really? That is not what she has been saying. You should visit her some time. She says she is lonely.

And for all we know Brian is dead. The comments at Questioning AIDS sure sound like his sudden unfortunate departure left things unsettled. Still, people have commented that the unique syntax of his crazy rants continues to be seen online. So until there is evidence either way, I would rule his existence undecided.But then who cares?

Following on from the above, it looks like all out war on 'Questioning Aids' - they are at each others throats. Now that Karri Stokely is dead they have all but put a ban on speculation about her death. And the unbelievable attacks on Emery Taylor for being a 'denialist' (am I getting something wrong here? They were all 'Crowe-ing' about what a good bloke he was for being a 'dissident' now they are like blood hounds attacking him for 'ignoring' his health!) are incredible hypocrisy. While Jonathan Barnett injects himself with 'Vitamin C', he taps on his laptop about what a bad boy Emery was. Now Barnett and Gos (Charles Rich) are leading a fight on QA against people who use 'uncivil' language, while Barnett & Gos call these very 'uncivil' people all the names under the sun! You couldn't make it up. Barnett & Gos (newly installed as a 'moderator') have shut down QA's 'Off Topic Forum'(and removed it so it is all secret from view) because there was too much 'name-calling' between the 'Birther', '9/11' conspiracy theorists, 'there is no climate change' and 'Vaccinations are killing everyone' nut jobs! Can you believe it?In the 'QA Feedback' section of the forum, they keep having 'Polls' about 'Ad Hominem Attacks' and 'Where has the Off Topic Forum Gone', in which about 6 people and a dog vote. (Im not joking the numbers ARE that small!)Once Kim Bannon is gone, I can't see how QA and the 'Crowes' can possibly survive!

It doesn't surprise me. Ever since Emery Taylor died QA has been in melt down. One guy, Mike Stewart, left a few days ago telling Gos & Barnett that "I wish QA the best...but as a GLBT activist I must take a stand against homophobia, racism against GLBT minorities and public forum support of bigoted anti-Semitism from its members." But he also said he went because "Since "coming out" as an AIDS activist and AIDS Dissident, this forum has shown itself to be hopelessly mired in pro-ARV propaganda..by both members and Forum Moderators. It is sad that has taken place, and after this post, I await "moderation" by Jonathan, Linda, Gos or others." BuffaloBoy, who is on ARVs and was constantly attacked, hasn't been seen in a long while. So how they can be 'pro-ARV' when people like T.Rex and BuffaloBoy, both on ARVs, get it in the neck every time they show their face on QA is amazing. The 'hardliners' - one serious if tiny bunch of nasty losers - are in a constant warfare with Barnett, Gos and the other mods (who only support ARVs as a 'last resort deathbed choice'!). They seem to hate each other.They got themselves into a terrible mess around 'Wikipedia' when dennisn, a wikipedia editor posted about the crap in House of Numbers, it soon became a terrible name-calling tirade amongst themselves, between the Mods and the Hardliners, and whether it was ok to call 'dennisn' a Rat! lol So amongst themselves they can't work out whether they are 'pro-ARV' or 'anti-ARV', whether it's ok to call non-denialists the most foul names, while in those discussions they accuse each other of being 'delusional', 'traitors', 'dangerous to dissidence', 'an embarrassment to the dissidence movement' 'a windbag who wouldn't know a political issue if it smashed him in the face', that last one being directed at Gos - I had to laugh at that as I've seen 'Gos Blank (Charles Rich)' profile pic on Facebook and he aint pretty honey!

I am not sure what actually the denialist meant to prove with his hypocritical thoughts. For the help of AIDS people many orgnizarion is working hard with a bunch of people from all corner of the world. I heard they are using employee monitoring software to maintain their works. Hopefully the thread for HIV will be gone in near future.

This is really a great article.I think this website will help us to aware about AIDS.Its very dangerous.!st of all we have be careful about it.Now a days its an very important issue in the world.And the whole conversations are really great.There are many important information about AIDS in this conversation.

Read Ben Goldacre and keep up with Bad Science

Don't Get Fooled Again: The Skeptic's Guide to Life by Richard Wilson

AIDS Denialism on Law & Order

If you missed the Law & Order episode 'Retro' on AIDS denialism you will want to see the 2-minute Replay. This episode portrays a woman who denies she has HIV in which she and her infant daughter both die of AIDS. Sound familiar? Click the pic to watch.

Learn More about Pseudoscience

Search This Blog

In Denying AIDS, Seth Kalichman provides a fascinating look into the thinking of those who propagate AIDS myths and the negative impact they have on our response to a deadly disease. He shows us how AIDS pseudoscience confuses the public and threatens sound public health policy. Anyone who cares about the global HIV/AIDS pandemic should read this book. Helene D. Gayle, Chair of the 2009 US Presidential Council on AIDS, CEO CARE USA, former Assistant Surgeon GeneralSeth Kalichman brilliantly uses a psychological lens to expose the wacky world that creates and maintains its presence despite the untold numbers of deaths and suffering it has caused. This book is a wake up call to policy makers and scientists, particularly in places most affected by the pandemic, that denialism must be confronted if we want to bring it under control. A must read for those who want to know more about the power and influence of pseudoscience.Michael Merson, Director, Global Health Institute at Duke University and Former Director of the World Health Organization's Global Program on AIDS.

This excellent book examines the detailed history of HIV/AIDS denialism as well as its damaging impact throughout the world. HIV/AIDS denialism and its proponents have created confusion when the clear provision of scientifically accurate communication was most needed.James Curran, Dean of the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University, Former Director of the CDC HIV/AIDS Division.

Seth Kalichman has superbly captured the contradictions inherent in AIDS denialism. He has deftly uncovered its religious-like fervor, its vociferous proponents and passionate opponents as well as its destructive force when legitimized by the South African President.Salim S. Abdool Karim, Member of the 2000 South African Presidential Panelon AIDS, Professor at University of KwaZulu-Natal, and Director of Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA)

Royalties from Denying AIDS are donated to buy HIV treatments in Africa